"Change authority" vs. CAB

Discuss and debate ITIL Change Management issues
Post Reply
User avatar
jf
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:00 pm

Tue Nov 08, 2005 5:26 am



User avatar
Roger
Senior Itiler
Senior Itiler
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 8:00 pm

Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:07 am

User avatar
manish
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: India

Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:40 am

User avatar
BorisBear
ITIL Expert
ITIL Expert
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 8:00 pm
Location: Sunderland

Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:00 am

jf wrote:What is the difference between "Change authority" and "Change Advisory Board"?

The official definitions are "A group that is given the authority to approve Change, e.g. by a project board. Sometimes referred to as the Configuration Board." and "A group of people who can give expert advice to Change Management on the implementation of Changes. This Board is likely to be made up of representatives from all areas within IT and representatives from business units.

This would suggest that the CAB is Advisory only, as its name says. Yet ITIL documentaiton also says that a CAB must be convened to approve RFCs!

Any ideas on the difference would be appreciated.

My take on this would be that a Change Authority would approve change but the Change Manager approves the implementation of change. The Change Advisory Board give their two cents to the Change Manager who considers and takes the decision about whether to approve the change.

The Change Manager acts as safeguard to the IT environment in this respect.


All just my opinion and every organisation will be slightly different
User avatar
Timo
ITIL Expert
ITIL Expert
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:00 pm
Location: Calgary, Canada

Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:15 pm

We did something similar with one of our clients where we used CAB to approve a need for change (business approval) and Change Manager would authorize deployment of change.
Post Reply